Swordsman422

If they were going to extend the class in any direction, rather they did the first three; Nimitz, Eisenhower, and Vinson. Reagan and Bush won't look right without a Superhornet to fly off of them.

You must have missed the link to it I posted... Here you go again. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3301031/?sphrase_id=209497

The simmed jet being the wrong specific model hasn't stopped modders before. Just look at the sheer number of VF-84 liveries in the downloads section, not just for the F-14B they never flew, but for non-Navy, non-US aircraft. To answer the OP's question, is this one it? https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3301031/?sphrase_id=209497 The livery was in fact real, per this image:

1. Yes, but probably not right away. 2. Prime and 3rd party developers have to communicate and cooperate to integreate SC and the F-14 into overall DCS functionality. 3. See above. Asking for specific dates is pointless, but "by the end of EA" whenever that is. 4. Probably.

One of the stock VF-11 and VF-143 liveries were from their time on the John Stennis. These were the only two squadrons equipped with the B model Tomcat to ever deploy aboard her.

The main structure of the beaver tail only differed with jets from Block 75 and before, and we're very unlikely to get those. I think they've already stated they were adding the option for the bullet fairing on the TCS but haven't clarified if removal will be an option. Right now, all I am referring to is the physical model of the F-14A and not its flying qualities. My point is if what we get is a contemporary of the F-14B (I hope), then there isn't really anything new or exciting on the 3D model to see except a few tiny bits and the engine nozzles. Even the specific external details of an F-14A from the mid 1980s differed little enough that it would warrant much in terms of images. "And here's a shot of the F-14A's shorter TACAN antenna." Yeah, whoop. I could use to see some shots of the TF30 nozzle thrust phases, but there's not many images of a nearly physically identical aircraft that's going to get me more excited or tell me they've made more progress when the vast majority of what they need for the A is coding like the flight dynamics and engine modelling, stuff you can't screenshot to show progress. They've said they're working on it while simultaneously having to jump through new hoops with ED's update schedule. I don't have any reason not to believe them and some screenshots aren't going to change that.

By two gauges. The engine instruments and placement of the RWR are all that's different. Most likely the only thing that will change about the exterior are the engine exhaust nozzles and shrouds. Maybe we'll see a change in the gun gas vents and deletion of some ECM blisters but little else.

I worked for one of those on your list in one of the data production departments. Let's just say I was not shocked by the hack. It was just a matter of time. I've been convinced by this thread not to update to 2.5.6 for a while...

Anyone up for this one? I've tried, but CS4 isn't up to the task. I can provide decal scans of the tail art if required.

Yeah, that's one thing about the S-3. Never take a fuel-critical F-14 to it expecting a mid-mission fill up. A single Tomcat will suck it to bingo and still not be topped off. Take 3-5 thousand pounds and move on. I wish we could tell our wingmen how much gas they can take from a tanker.

Good catch Tread Head. That is definately the port side wing root of an A-6 Intruder. The vent below the canopy is a dead giveaway. It might be a KA-6D.

CVN-71, -72, and -73 in EA with -74 and -75 added later, if I read right.

Loving the VF-2 jets! If I might make a suggestion/request, these Bounty Hunter jets from 1989 and ODS would be cool:

Maybe by then we'll have playable Super Hornets to fly from them as well. Neither of them ever saw Tomcats and a deck full of legacy hornets would look just weird.

There are 5x as many operational Nimitz-class ships carrying 5x more aircraft, though, so it's bound to be the case just by gross numbers. What's the mishaps per operational hour rate?

That VF-1 jet looks fantastic. It's almost a shame Heatblur's Tomcat collection won't also include a Block 70 or 75 model.

Looks like he cross-controlled. I don't think the real world results would have been anywhere near as positive. Supposedly Mugs McKeown used a similar maneuver in an F-4B to get a MiG-17 to overshoot, but it's apparently a hell of a ride.

The good news for you is that the glossy sheen didn't last particularly long on deployment. The GGW scheme didn't weather as badly as the TPS, but it did deteriorate and take on a more matt appearance. I'll see if I can find a few for you.

Longest serving and most common variant, only F-14 variant with any recorded air-to-air victories, first variant to drop bombs in anger, only Tomcat version featured as a centerpiece in any movies, only Tomcat "everyone's" favorite squadron flew. I can understand the enthusiasm. Don't kink shame.

Considering the F-14A was still in service in 1989 and remained in service until 2005, yeah, a nugget pilot probably got training in the A, especially if the fleet squadron they were planned to go to flew that version. In 1998 F-14A BuNo 161445, flown by a student pilot training with VF-101, collided with instructor-flown F-14B BuNo 163218 during a night time interception exercise. So newly-minted nuggets continued to train in the F-14A until there weren't any As left in the fleet.

This might be counter to the pursuit of accuracy, but considering DCS takes place in a fictional world, sometimes skipping the crew names might be okay. Who is to say that in the DCS universe those same aviators are in the player's squadron? It's a stretch but just a thought. These all look fantastic, guys. I'm also +1 for VF-103 and VF-74 circa Desert Storm. AA212 would be a particular ask. If needed, I can provide scans of the Afterburner Decals 1/48 sheet which includes 200, 201, and 212 from the ODS deployment.

YES!!!!

Well... Felix is packin'...

If you actually bought and paid for the product, razo+r's suggestion is the quickest way.

You also wouldn't ever pull on it by accident... unless you're a surface warfare guy taking a ride in the back seat and think the lower handle is there to hold onto during high-G maneuvers. But no one has ever in the history of humanity been that dumb...